NAFTA

[Deacs89]

non-sequitur after non-sequitur.

Having a conversation shouldn't be this difficult.

lol fair enough. I am just talking bro. I am not trying to defend my thesis. Feel free to say what has you the most confused and I will try and clarify for you.

 

[DeaconSig]

I think its awesome. No matter how much the President admits that he really doesn't know about how anything operates in the federal government (including the legislative process and foreign policy) those who voted for him are certain that he is a genius who has a reason for every one of his actions or statements. They think each thing is some sort of 4-D chess move that will ultimately lead to success.

At this point, he could piss on the Lincoln Memorial and his supporters would find a reason to suggest it will help him get tax reform through.

Read this article. http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/27/the-education-of-donald-trump-237669

Or read any of the interviews he has done with the AP/NYT/WaPo over the past month or so. The truth is, the President has admitted that he really didn't have any idea what his current job entailed until he started doing it. He still is motivated by factors that really shouldn't have an impact on how he governs (such as how the story will be spun on cable news). He doesn't have experienced people around him to facilitate a ramped-up learning curve. And he really doesn't have much desire to actually learn.

The President still has plenty of time to turn things around. Maybe he, and his administration, will actually use his complete lack of belief in any ideology other than that of his own greatness to benefit the country. But [Rubio] let's not pretend like he knows exactly what he is doing. He has no fucking idea what he is doing [/Rubio].

 

[ImTheCaptain]

lol fair enough. I am just talking bro. I am not trying to defend my thesis. Feel free to say what has you the most confused and I will try and clarify for you.

there's two way to go through live: talkin' bro and not talking bro

choose wisely

 

[avalon]

To your point Avalon the question of how would reducing the deficit with Mexico translate into them paying for the wall is more nuanced than them signing us a big oversized check and most likely the left will never allow it to be validated for political reasons with upcoming elections etc. But I would say stopping Billions of dollars in currency flowing to Mexico and having those jobs and dollars spent here in the US economy more often would mean creating a competitive environment for America to compete in the export business and at home. If this is successful the net gain should pay for the wall.

Consumers buying products from US companies will not pay for the wall. And even if it did, that would be Americans paying for the wall.

 

[Deacs89]

Consumers buying products from US companies will not pay for the wall. And even if it did, that would be Americans paying for the wall.

well if you think about it Avalon, Mexico losing billions of dollars in currency and the US gaining essentially costs Mexico. Your argument is what the elite Dems will sell to the rubes to get their votes but Mexico is paying one way or the other.

 

[Deacs89]

there's two way to go through live: talkin' bro and not talking bro

choose wisely

what about livin le via loco

 

[RJKarl]

Of course 89 won't respond to real numbers and logic.

 

[Louis Gossett Jr]

That makes no logical sense. I have 100 dollars, you want me to give you 25 dollars so you can do something with it. I lose 25 dollars gambling, and now have 75 dollars. You win 25 dollars gambling and now use it for what you wanted me to pay for. I didn't pay for it, you did, my loss has no correlation to your payment or gain except it happened in the same sphere of circumstances.

 

[RJKarl]

well if you think about it Avalon, Mexico losing billions of dollars in currency and the US gaining essentially costs Mexico. Your argument is what the elite Dems will sell to the rubes to get their votes but Mexico is paying one way or the other.

If we put a tariff on them, they will put a tariff on us. Americans will still be able to buy Mexican products, but US sales to Mexico will dramatically drop as individuals and companies will be priced out of buying US goods.

 

[avalon]

Man, those elite Dems sure sound sneaky.

 

[birdman]

well if you think about it Avalon, Mexico losing billions of dollars in currency and the US gaining essentially costs Mexico. Your argument is what the elite Dems will sell to the rubes to get their votes but Mexico is paying one way or the other.

Dude, you are talking about fake money.

US Citizens will be paying higher prices for their Walmart products and our tax dollars will directly pay for an ecologically damaging wall, sounds to me like we are paying twice...but if you bend over backwards and look at it with rose colored glass between your legs, Mexico are the ones really paying because we are losing less money to them via trade.

 

[ImTheCaptain]

birdman starting to get a little tired of winning

 

[WFFaithful]

geeez easy Trump jr. being in business does not qualify you to make trade deals nor does being in politics. Being good at message boarding for example does not mean you could venture out to a party and have anyone there give a fuck about what you think. However, the business principles in negotiation are relevant in all deals of any sort. Each party starts at the opposite end of the spectrum and you have to have a willingness to compromise. I think Trump is willing to do that. I can tell you this if you have done any business and you start out with the most plausible mutually beneficial deal for both you and the other party you are a fucking tool and you will end up giving up more in the deal when it is done.

D7 what don't you understand? You can't be that dense?
I will try and explain one more time. If there is presently a 50 billion trade deficit with Mexico and Trump re negotiates NAFTA. If he does a shit job and only is able to get a deal where there is still a 30 billion trade deficit you have 20 billion left over for the wall. But just for your idiocy the wall just got 10 ft taller.

Facepalm

 

[ImTheCaptain]

89, do you believe that "trade deficit/surplus" represents actual dollars the government has to spend

 

[Deacs89]

89, do you believe that "trade deficit/surplus" represents actual dollars the government has to spend

So can you tell me why the US would benefit from a renogitated trade deal and what would Mexico stand to lose?

 

[Deacs89]

And no ITC I think I explained that.
However are you telling me its impossible to monetize the benefits of a better deal?

 

[Pilchard]

By Deacs89's Math, Trump merely needs to prohibit all trade with Mexico, and the US would immediately have $50 billion to throw around. Wow. Running the US is easier than I realized.

 

[RJKarl]

So can you tell me why the US would benefit from a renogitated trade deal and what would Mexico stand to lose?

The best ways we can benefit would be on things like truck safety and environmental issues.

I explained before how we have won BIGLY on trade with Mexico. They are buy FAR more per capita from the US than we are buying from them. You can't expect a country that is only 36% of another to buy more than the much larger country buys from the smaller.

Add to this, our bigger population has more money to spend.

We are doing GREAT in trade with Mexico.

I don't get why you won't respond to these simple and very civil posts.

 

[RJKarl]

By Deacs89's Math, Trump merely needs to prohibit all trade with Mexico, and the US would immediately have $50 billion to throw around. Wow. Running the US is easier than I realized.

And $500B to buy Trump steaks if we did the same with China.

 

[Deacs89]

So the US government and economy will not benefit from a better trade deal? Mexico will lose no money from the new deal? There is nothing wrong with the current deal? Ha holy fuck.